Pages

Friday, December 2, 2016

Primary Source Analysis: Pope Leo I the Great & the Council of Chalcedon, 5th Century CE

Pope Leo I's letter
to the bishop Flavian regarding the heretical theologian Eutyches,
alongside the definition of the faith from the Council of Chalcedon,
are both documents written in the year 451 CE during a period of
recurring theological dissonance between different arms of the Church
throughout the fragmented and decaying Roman Empire. Pope Leo, also
known as Pope Leo I the Great, was in constant correspondence with
many disparate portions of Christendom, intervening in an attempt to
mend theological schisms through rebutting heresies and implementing
strong sanctions on those who did not strictly follow the tenets of
the faith.1
The Bishop Flavian is addressed in the letter also intended as one
such Papal intervention in the proceedings of the Council of
Chalcedon, elaborating on Christological concerns regarding the
proper relationship between God the Father and God the Son in light
of a strictly defined institutionalized orthodoxy.2
The primary focus of this paper will be on such Christological
concerns as they appear in the primary source documents already named
above, placing them and their authors in the historical context of
the fourth and fifth centuries, as well as identifying some of the
religious themes and theologies surrounding.

Though eastern
Byzantine Christian orthodoxy was slowly yet inexorably drifting away
from the purview of the western church, during the time of the
Council of Chalcedon in the middle of the fifth century, the two
sects had not completely removed themselves from the others orbit. As
such, it was not highly unusual for the western papacy to
occasionally involve itself in the activities and controversies of
the east. Pope Leo I, whose pontificate was dedicated to the
preservation of orthodoxy and the unification of the western church,
felt compelled to contribute to the ecumenical debate in Chalcedon
through letter, condemning Eutychianism and reaffirming the equally
human and divine natures of Christ.3
The letter itself, written in the evocative, religiously-layered
prose typical of the time, was probably first penned in Latin from
the Pope's residence in Rome and sent to Chalcedon by way of sea or
land. Eutyches, who had first seen himself ejected from the
priesthood on the grounds of his alleged heresy, was reinstated a
priest until the Council of Chalcedon in 451, when, according to Leo,
he spoke of renouncing his heresies, thus deserving mercy under the
doctrine of the church.4

The heresies
allegedly committed by Eutyches were primarily Christological in
nature. Whereas the orthodox position, articulated by Leo, held that
Christ was both human and divine since his conception, Eutyches
emphasized the divine nature of Christ, seemingly to the neglect of
any human nature if we are to accept Pope Leo's interpretation of
Eutyches' beliefs.5
The orthodox position was reaffirmed in the definition of faith from
the Council of Chalcedon, a statement of collective religious belief
and prescribed dogmas agreed upon for the eastern Byzantine church by
the close of debate.6
The statement also clarifies the purpose of Leo's letter to Flavian
as having been written also for the Council of Chalcedon. As well,
nowhere is a single author named for the definition of the faith, but
the start of the document specifies that both the Council and the
resulting agreement were decreed orthodox by Marcian and Valentinian
Augustus, the latter, as emperor of the Byzantine (or Eastern Roman)
Empire, and the former, as emperor of the Western Roman Empire during
its period of final decline.7
The overarching purpose of the definition of the faith is a
reaffirmation of the beliefs and dogmas decided upon at the Council
of Nicaea in 325 CE, alongside the Council of Constantinople in 381
CE. Partially affirmed, as well, is the consensus on doctrine agreed
upon at the Council of Ephesus in 449 CE. However, in explicitly
designating the Nicaean and Constantinopolitan councils as more
authoritative in their consensus than Ephesus, this definition of the
faith in some sense 'repealed' the heretical doctrines put forth two
years earlier without rejecting them entirely.8

Near the end of the
definition of the faith, there is a more nuanced rebuttal to a
heretic other than Eutyches, as the document turns its attention to
those who refuse to apply the title of “God-bearer,”9
or as it was known in its original Greek, “Theotokos,”10
to the Virgin Mary. This heretic, who went by the name of Nestorius,
was officially challenged and disgraced in his beliefs through
letters written by Cyril, the pastor of Alexandria until his death.
In these letters, Cyril asserts that through rejection of the
God-bearer title, it is implied that Nestorius thus did not believe
that Christ was God.11
What one must wonder is whether or not this was a broad-sweep
misinterpretation of Nestorian theology, one which saw all
alternative Biblical interpretation as a serious sin, perhaps in part
because of the perceived threat it posed to existing orthodox
structures and doctrine. Interesting as well is that “Theotokos,”
the original Greek terminology for “God-bearer,” has often also
been translated as “Mother of God,”12
and is likely the etymological source of the use of said title as a
statement expressing sudden shock or disbelief. Certainly, the
Christian reverence for the Virgin Mary would also in part be
causative of the strong emotional tone usually associated with its
cultural use as an expression.

Central
to both the definition of the faith and Pope Leo's letter to Flavian
and the Council of Chalcedon itself is the Nicene Creed, indirectly
referenced earlier with the mention of the First Council of Nicaea in
325 CE. Pope Leo, in his letter, articulately paraphrases it as “the
common and undivided creed by which the whole body of the faithful
confess that they believe ... [one:] in God the Father almighty, and
[two:] in Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord ... who [three:] was
born of the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary.”13
This creed, authoritative in both the eastern and western churches,
was explicated and approved as dogma at the above mentioned Council
of Nicaea, establishing the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as a
counterweight to theologies such as Arianism and Sabellianism.
Whereas, on the one hand, Arianism stressed significant difference in
substance between God the Father and God the Son, Sabellianism, on
the other hand, pushed an argument which emphasized that both God the
Father and God the Son were of a single, unified substance.14
As examples, Arianism and Sabellianism are two among many, a
well-spring of competing theologies which posed a threat to the
institutionalized centralization of power in the hands of existing
church structures, both east and west. Sabellianism, as well, is
similar in theological substance to the ideas disseminated by
Eutyches. Though the heresies of the fourth century differed
slightly from those of the fifth, the tradition of countering
opposing theologians by convening an ecumenical council and coming to
(or forcing) a consensus was, by this time, over a century old.15
It must be clarified that during this period in history, the divide
between the eastern and western churches was not so dichotomous. Pope
Leo I's involvement in the Council of Chalcedon, hosted as it was in
Byzantine Anatolia, is evidence of this, as both east and west
continued to push their doctrines as universal despite their growing
so far apart over time as to become as discernible from one another
as they are today. Though the Nicene Creed remained a mutual
doctrinal bedrock for both sects, nuanced differences piled up and
evolved over time to create the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic
churches as we know them. Pope Leo I died ten years after the Council
of Chalcedon, in 461 CE,16
earning the posthumous moniker of “the Great” for his many
important contributions to early Christianity, as well as for the
effort he expended to maintain orthodoxy throughout Christendom. One
must wonder if a heretic is something nearly exclusive to monotheism,
with its insistence on a single deity and thus a single, irrevocable
truth. In conclusion, this truth is a clumsy set of contractual
mantras. Stipulating a contract not so much with God as with a
religious bureaucracy defending its sacred hierarchies, these final
words from the definition of the faithspell
it out clearly enough: “no one is permitted to produce, or even to
write down or compose, any other creed or to think or teach
otherwise.”17
Such singular universalisms bred the religious conflict so typical of
the day, as each new and nuanced interpretation was taken as a
revelation that now needed to be imposed on the world for its own
wicked sake. Structures of oppression were given an unassailable
religious legitimacy that elevated kings and popes into men appointed
by a metaphysical deity for the good of all. As regards this and all
religious conflict, one can perhaps reflect on the words of Pope Leo
himself when he said of all heretics, of which he was one in contrast
to others, that “[b]y not being pupils of the truth, they turn out
to be masters of error.”18

PLEASE NOTE: THIS WAS WRITTEN AS AN ESSAY FOR A HISTORY CLASS ON EARLY TO MID-MEDIEVAL EUROPE, ANALYZING DIRECTLY THE PRIMARY DOCUMENTS LISTED BELOW AND SUPPLEMENTED WITH CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION FROM THE PROVIDED TEXT.

On This Day in History:

Our World Is Ours to Keep.

Copyright

The world is meaningless,

there is no God or gods, there are no morals, the universe is not moving inexorably towards any higher purpose.All meaning is man-made, so make your own, and make it well.Do not treat life as a way to pass the time until you die.Do not try to "find yourself", you must make yourself.Choose what you want to find meaningful and live, create, love, hate, cry, destroy, fight and die for it.Do not let your life and your values and your actions slip easily into any mold, other that that which you create for yourself, and say with conviction, "This is who I make myself".Do not give in to hope.Remember that nothing you do has any significance beyond that with which you imbue it.Whatever you do, do it for its own sake.When the universe looks on with indifference, laugh, and shout back, "Fuck You!".Rembember that to fight meaninglessness is futile, but fight anyway, in spite of and because of its futility.The world may be empty of meaning, but it is a blank canvas on which to paint meanings of your own.Live deliberately. You are free.

Looking for something in particular?

MY CURRENT LOCATION:

Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

Please Note: The location is roughly accurate. It will be updated every time I log on and happen to be in a significantly different location.

CHECK THESE OUT:

About Me

I am a twenty-four year old male living in the western Canadian city of Victoria, British Columbia. I politically self-identify as a libertarian socialist, and religiously seem to embody philosophical Taoism in terms of my spiritual worldview.